Differences in atrial versus ventricular remodeling in dogs with ventricular tachypacing-induced congestive heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Congestive heart failure (CHF) causes arrhythmogenic remodeling in both atria and ventricles, but differences between atrial and ventricular remodeling in CHF have not been well characterized. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined atrial and ventricular tissues from dogs with CHF induced by ventricular tachypacing (220-240/min) for 0 (control) or 24 h, or 1, 2 or 5 weeks. Histopathology was used to assess apoptosis, fibrosis, white blood cell infiltration and cell death, ELISA to measure angiotensin-II concentration and Western blot to evaluate protein expression. Ventricular tachypacing-induced CHF was associated with substantially more fibrosis in left atrium (maximum 10 +/- 1% at 5 weeks) than in left ventricle (0.4 +/- 0.1% at 5 weeks, P < 0.01 versus left atrium). Tissue angiotensin-II concentration increased to steady state in atrial tissue at 24 h but increased more slowly in left ventricle, with a maximum that was significantly higher in atrium than ventricle. Ventricular tachypacing caused tissue apoptosis, inflammatory cell infiltration and cell death, with maximum changes in left atrium being faster, transient and larger than in left ventricle. Mitogen activated protein kinase activation was rapid (within 24 h) in left atrium, but smaller and slower (p38, c-Jun N-terminal kinase) or non-significant (extracellular signal-related kinase) in left ventricle. The 25-kDa activated form of transforming growth factor-beta1, a particularly important profibrotic mediator in atrium, increased significantly in left atrium, from 2.6 +/- 0.6 (control) to 9.2 +/- 1.7 (24 h) and 8.1 +/- 1.8 optical density units (1 week), but was not significantly changed in ventricle. CONCLUSIONS: There are qualitative and quantitative differences in atrial versus ventricular remodeling in experimental ventricular tachypacing-induced CHF, with potentially important consequences for understanding underlying mechanisms and developing new therapeutic approaches.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".